Pacific Gas and Electric Co. is spending millions of dollars on a new television advertising campaign, calling for preserving the public's right to vote.

But critics say the Proposition 16 campaign is really about quashing PG&E's competition.

Advertisement

"Power to the people" is an old rallying cry from the 1960s. Today it applies to an expensive ballot fight bankrolled by PG&E. It's an outgrowth of a 2006 ballot fight in which PG&E spent millions to keep Yolo County customers from breaking away.

It sounds good -- so why are groups such as the League of Women Voters incensed over these ads?

"I think the voters are fed up with this use of the initiative process. It's throwing money into something that's only for the good of this one corporation," Trudy Schafer from the League of Women Voters said.

And it's no small amount. By mid-March, according to state records, PG&E had spent $25 million of shareholder money, and it's now closer to $30 million.

"PG&E is investing in this initiative because they think it's important that voters have a say and that there be transparency when local governments decide to go into the retail electricity business," Robin Swanson from the "Yes on 16" campaign said.

Prop. 16 requires a two-thirds public vote. Whenever a local government wants to break away from PG&E and provide power on its own or through a publicly owned utility such as the Sacramento Municipal Utility District.

Critics say PG&E is really trying to stifle competition and protect its profits under the umbrella of voter rights.

"I think it's misleading, quite frankly. And that's why SMUD has joined with a number of other customer-owned utilities to challenge the initiative in court," Arlen Orchard, SMUD's general counsel, said.

Orchard said the measure would make it virtually impossible for nonprofit utilities like SMUD to expand. The campaign said it's the same standard as that for passing a local bond.

Veteran ballot-watcher Kim Alexander, from the California Voter Foundation, said all that PG&E money is no guarantee of success.

"I have a lot of confidence in California voters, that they are savvy, they're looking for who's behind this commercial, who's behind this campaign," Alexander said.

Alexander said the Prop. 16 funding is a good example of how rich special interests now dominate California's initiative process. But she points out that typically, only one out of three initiatives actually pass.

The measure is backed by groups like the California Chamber of Commerce and the California Taxpayers' Association -- both of which were unavailable for comment Monday. But all the funding itself comes from PG&E.